How to Make Better Decisions in Imperfect Communities
By Ursina Teuscher, PhD
Keynote talk presented at XII° Convegno Nazionale S.I.P.CO Palermo, June 7-9, 2018: Communita Imperfette – Dalle Dinamiche Disgregative al Decision Making Comunitario.
Summary
In communities that consist of diverse interest groups, it can be challenging to make decisions that are actively supported or at least accepted by all critical parties, despite their differing interests. Top-down decisions may face unexpected opposition, resulting in costs or delays.
This talk presents a process framework and practical tools to facilitate participatory decision processes. The suggested process is designed after a value-focused (Keeney, 1996) and multi-attribute model of decision making (e.g., Winterfeldt and Edwards, 1986, Anderson, Hahn, and Teuscher, 2013).
As a practical but broadly applicable model for interventions, the suggested process is structured into three stages. The first step is to determine the stakeholders and clarify what their interests are, and to involve the stakeholders in defining a measurable set of criteria. The second step is a search for innovative solutions that fulfill these criteria best. Unless the decision requires topic experts to draw up solutions, this stage may involve stakeholders and community members in a bid for innovative proposals. In the third and final step, the proposed solutions are evaluated along all criteria in a weighted multi-criteria decision analysis. An example of public involvement in a decision process in Oregon (facilitated by my colleague Sam Imperati) illustrates how to design a voting ballot in the form of a weighted decision table. In this case, the decision table served at the same time to inform the voters about the estimated facts associated with each option along all criteria. The example demonstrates that it is possible to evaluate even complex and controversial decisions in a democratic process, and that a democratic process can be quite different from a simple yes-or-no vote between unpopular options. Instead, it suggests a richer, yet efficient participatory process that is optimized for innovation, while being perceived as fair and transparent.
While the practical application shown here is a recent examples of a real public decision, rather than a research study, many previous case studies (reviews e.g., by Winterfeldt and Edwards, 1986; Anderson et al., 2013) show that participatory decision processes of this kind – following a value-focused and multi-attribute model – can lead to surprising amounts of innovation and agreement in challenging community decisions.
References:
Anderson, B., Hahn, D., & Teuscher, U. (2013). Heart and Mind: Mastering the Art of Decision Making. CreateSpace Publishing.
Keeney, R. L. (1996). Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision Making. Harvard University Press.
Winterfeldt, D. von, & Edwards, W. (1986). Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research. Cambridge University Press.
by Ursina Teuscher (PhD), at Teuscher Decision Coaching, Portland OR